Only 11% of Android devices run Ice Cream Sandwich

Android 4.0, otherwise known as Ice Cream Sandwich, was released last fall. More than eight months later, it’s migrated to just 11% of Android devices. The real figure may actually be a little lower; Google’s numbers are based on Android devices that connected to the Play store over the past two weeks. Android 2.3 Gingerbread was by far the most popular, garnering 64% of the pie. Less than 2.5% of users were on Honeycomb, the tablet-focused Android 3.x release.

The slow adoption of Android 4.0 doesn’t give us much hope that version 4.1, a.k.a. Jelly Bean, will be picked up en masse. Google is trying to ease the upgrade process for hardware makers, though. At the I/O conference last week, it announced that a Platform Developer kit will be available to device makers 2-3 months before new versions of the OS are released. A “beta PDK” for Jelly Bean has been circulating among hardware vendors for a few weeks already.

The problem, of course, is that all those folks want their Android devices to be unique. Most hardware makers drape their own skins over the UI and incorporate their own features into the OS. Those tweaks must be ported to new versions of Android, and having early access to the code should speed the process.

Some Android flavors are more heavily customized than others, and you can probably tell who’s doing more fiddling under the hood by how quickly Android updates are released. Asus doesn’t mess around too much with the OS, and its tablets were among the first to be upgraded to version 4.0. The TouchWiz-infused Samsung Galaxy Tab, however, is still waiting for its Ice Cream Sandwich. Apple doesn’t have this problem, and I’d be surprised if uneven OS updates afflicted the incoming wave of Windows 8 tablets. Thanks to The Verge for the tip.

Comments closed
    • ssidbroadcast
    • 7 years ago

    Geoff: But, you know, Android tablets are still better than sux0rz Apple iPad. Because herrr derr Apple is greedy and all uppitity and stuff. 😛 (<–that is drool coming out of your mouth, not a tongue)

    • trackerben
    • 7 years ago

    If this were about PCs, the title would be like “Only 11% of Windows PCs run Windows 7”. The Android and to some extent the iOS ecosystem are already exhibiting behaviors more like that of traditional, cycle-managed GP computing platforms. It’s ridiculous that all my comm and data functions should be tied to a single mobile screen, and one that demands almost as as much administrative attention as a PC at that.

    I still like my classic Nokia feature phone over iOS and androids, it’s functionally streamlined and dedicated to calls. Management and updates and systems stuff, those things are for work and high-end play of which I’ve got enough of already. On a more general purpose device like a tablet these issues are more tolerable because the purposes are different and usage is less interrupt-driven.

    • TechNut
    • 7 years ago

    Only 11% of Android devices can run Ice Cream Sandwich

    …. There fixed that for you.

    The big challenge with Android is that not all phones can run all versions. The original Galaxy S for example, it is stuck on 2.3 forever. Yes, there are unofficial mods to do it, but, Samsung will never release a true version of 4.0+ for that phone. Many in-expensive phones are also stuck at Android 2.2 or so, because of their limited specs.

    If you think about it, this makes sense. If a phone has a contract life of 3 years (not uncommon in Canada), and Android started to get popular 18 months ago, then, we should have a large number of 2.x devices on the market. We should see 4.0+ versions increasing this year into next as 2 year cell plans expire and people get the newest 4.1+ phones at the time.

    This is what partially killed BlackBerry. crappy OS with long contract cycles usually means someone wants to swap the phone for something better at the end of the contract. If the OS is crap, and it does not work well, you are more likely to go to something else, versus what you had.. again, unless you where a BBM addict.. in that case all bets where off 🙂

      • MadManOriginal
      • 7 years ago

      That’s exactly the problem, and no your first sentence is wrong taken on its own and you don’t go on to support it in the rest of your post. Many phones which came out with GB *can* run ICS (there are new single core phones coming out with ICS stock), there’s just nothing in it for manufacturers or carriers to provide updates. They won’t make any more money providing these updates so they simply don’t, and it’s unfortunate that people just accept it.

      The rest of your post is a decent, if obvious, explanation of why not many phones are on ICS yet – they are running the software they came with, or a slightly updated version. However, that doesn’t make it OK that so many phones don’t get updates.

        • TechNut
        • 7 years ago

        While I do mostly agree with you many manufacturers follow the corp. policy on Android, which it needs to be officially supported by Google. In corporate-speak that means if Google does not say its in the specs, it’s not supported.

        For example, Google lists Android 3+ (4+ for phones) as requiring dual core. Sammy and the others will not generally release a update for a phone if Google says the phone needs dual cores. The official line on the Galaxy S was there not enough room built in NAND for TouchWiz, but, reality was/is Google does not support manufacturers who wander off of spec since it is a single core system or not enough NAND. I shudder to think how bad my phone would be with ICS and a single core if it could be made to work. It’s pretty tardy on 2.3.3.

        It does hold the industry back having to be compatible with Android 2.x. Hopefully this year will start seeing ICS-based devices pick up due to contract turnover.

          • cynan
          • 7 years ago

          What makes you think ICS would run slower than Gingerbread? From what I’ve read, ICS, if anything, is a smoother experience overall. But then I suppose that could be due to the customizations made to the official ICS to get it to run properly on older devices..

          Essentially, Android is like Linux was and still is in many ways. Not all hardware configurations are supported off the bat, but if your device meets the basic hardware requirements and isn’t grossly obscure, then more than likely you’ll be able to find a community fairly easily that has developed a compatible version of the latest and greatest version of the OS for your device.

          Because Android itself is technically free there is no cut to be made offering upgrades to the customer. I think charging nominal fees for Android upgrades may be a good model and incentive for carriers/manufacturers to keep their device OS up to date – similar to what Apple does with OSX. Then those who care about having ICS on, say an SGS, can pay the $19.99 or whatever for the upgrade if they don’t feel like fooling with/taking the risk of rooting their phone, etc. Sure a lot of people would initially complain about such a fee, but it’s surely a better alternative than being SOL entirely.

          And when older OS version does stop being supported, this could give some customers the option of paying a relatively small fee instead of having to immediately upgrade their device to maintain compatibility with new software/apps.

      • cynan
      • 7 years ago

      MadMan is correct. In the majority of cases, it’s because handset makers or carriers don’t want to bother with the updates, not because it is impossible to run ICS on said devices.

      [url=http://www.cyanogenmod.com/devices<]Here is a list of devices[/url<] supported on various versions of Cyanongenmod 9, which is ICS based. Notice that the Galaxy S is included here, along with a whole bunch of other devices with no official update for ICS.

        • BabelHuber
        • 7 years ago

        True. From a customer’s perspective, e.g. the SGS should be upgraded to ICS.

        But from Samsung’s point of view, providing more updates means higher costs, and this would make the phones more expensive.

        So, would Samsung have higher sales because customers would prefer more upgradable phones, or would Samsung have lower sales because customers would rather buy the cheaper phones?

        Asked differently: How many customers don’t buy another Samsung phone because the SGS doesn’t get ICS? And how many don’t even know or don’t care?

        Hell, I recently talked to an SGS owner who said he dislikes the ‘Android contacts’. When I pointed out that his contact book is from Samsung and easily replaceable by another app, he looked quite surprised…

    • LoneWolf15
    • 7 years ago

    Finally, leaked (not hacked) builds of ICS have been coming out for the Droid Bionic, so I’m running it.

    And yet, if Google I/O is any indicator, ICS will be a flash in the pan, as they try to turn all eyes to 4.1 (Jelly Bean). Which will probably require a new phone in the vast majority of cases, not due to hardware needs as much as carrier/vendor apathy, and Google’s disinterest in unifying their platform.

    This really bothers me. If Google wants a dedicated user base, perhaps it is time to tighten their standards with phone vendors and carriers in a manner that guarantees consistent support, not just for users, but for application developers as well. Google seems to try to get away with caring “just enough” to continue revenue of their core products; either that, or (probably more likely) just don’t have the focus required to stay consistent, something that may be okay with home users, but is extremely frustrating for tech enthusiasts and the enterprise market.

      • Arag0n
      • 7 years ago

      Some if not most of phones won´t have enough RAM neither ROM (installable area for Android besides the SDCard) to handle the new OS. That´s why most of Android devices selling today with 2.3.3 will never see ICS and beyond….

    • HighTech4US2
    • 7 years ago

    This is exactly the reason I avoided Android Tablets until now.

    Many were shipped with outdated versions of Android (out of the box) and if an update ever came it was very very late.

    That is why I have pre-ordered The Google Nexus 7 that will come preloaded with Android 4.1 (Jelly Bean). The latest and greatest Android.

    And when an Android update happens I expect that Google will make it available to their customers ASAP.

      • cynan
      • 7 years ago

      I wouldn’t hold my breath.

      I have a Galaxy Nexus. Because I’m in Canada, apparently Samsung handles the OTA Android updates and did not seem to do so frequently. Whatever the case, it seemed to forever for updates to be sent out. I was sick of being stuck on Android 4.02 while others were on 4.04 so, last week, I finally just rooted the device and installed my own custom rom.

      Timely OS updates were one of the reasons I wanted the Galaxy Nexus. So much for that.

        • MadManOriginal
        • 7 years ago

        OMG YOU WERE .02 BEHIND!! OOOOH THE HUMANITY!!

          • Corrado
          • 7 years ago

          Maybe he encountered a showstopper bug? My Galaxy S would not stay connected to bluetooth for more than 5 mintues if wifi was left on. Since I have a Ford with Sync, thats a deal breaker. They fixed the issue in 2.3.3, but my phone shipped with 2.3.1.

            • cynan
            • 7 years ago

            Well, whatever the reason, the custom AOKP 4.04 rom and kernel I installed resulted in a more fully customizable OS, slightly faster performance and noticeably better battery life than the 2 stock roms I had had prior. So in the end, it ended up being for the best.

          • cynan
          • 7 years ago

          Lol. It’s the principle that matters. I assumed buying a Google branded phone would get me first dibs at OS releases. It turned out that that wasn’t exactly the case.

        • funko
        • 7 years ago

        or you could’ve just flashed to yakju to get google’s OTA updates

          • Arag0n
          • 7 years ago

          Still, you don´t get the point. Users should not be asked to learn how the hell to deal with phone updates and trick updates to their handsets. What would you think if tomorrow Windows decides to shut down windows update and in order to get your updates you need to visit daily windows fans-sites with instructions about how to install the new updates that improve reliability, security and functionality of the OS?

            • BabelHuber
            • 7 years ago

            No, you don’t get the point: The market for PCs is totally different from the smartphone market.

            In the smartphone market, the carriers decide which phones they sell subsidized with 2-year-contracts.

            If the carrier doesn’t sell your phone, your market share will be tiny, since the majority of customers will buy a phone the carrier supports.

            E.g. T-Mobile Germany refuses to sell the Lumia 900. Instead, the carrier pushes SGS3 for €1 with contract.
            So, when you walk into a T-Mobile store and ask for the Lumia 900, the sales personal tries to sell you an SGS3.

            If you buy the SGS3, you will get the T-Mobile version of Android. Obviously this means you won’t get your Android updates from Google or Samsung, but from T-Mobile.

            Now let’s assume Samsung would have refused to let T-Mobile customize Android.

            Would T-Mobile have said ‘OK, we’ll sell it your way, then’ or would T-Mobile have said ‘Fine. The HTC One X is a good phone, too’?

            • Corrado
            • 7 years ago

            T-Mobile does NONE of the ‘customizations’. T-Mobile asks Samsung to install a few apps in the ROM image. The entire update process belongs to Samsung except for final sign off by T-Mobile.

            • BabelHuber
            • 7 years ago

            Probably you are right, most likely Samsung itself does the customization for T-Mobile.

            But that’s just a minor point, the main points are:

            – Different versions of the OS for different carriers delays OS updates and also makes updates more expensive in general

            – The carrers decide which phones they sell, so the manufacturers have to play nice (except if they have the power to force the carriers to play their game, which does not happen very often)

            • Arag0n
            • 7 years ago

            While you are right, you should acknowledge at least that means that the platform is very troublesome and inefficient. WP7 and iOS have the same customized apps preloaded for carriers in different countries but those apps are isolated from the OS itself. Drivers are also isolated from the OS so that leaves updates from the system isolated from the customizations that carriers and manufacturers do. iOS drivers may not be isolated, but given how iOS is handled by Apple no matter if it is or not, it won´t change a thing. So, system updates in the case of windows phone just need approval by the manufacturer and carrier that must confirm that their devices won´t go crazy if the update is received, in the case of iOS just carrier approval.

            Both updating systems are extremely cheaper for manufacturers and carriers, so guess who has a broken system?

            • BabelHuber
            • 7 years ago

            Yes and no.

            The customization of Android by carriers goes deeper than the iOS- and Windows-customizations.

            E.g. more often than not, you are unable to uninstall the carrier’s apps without rooting the phone.

            You are right that Android’s approach is worse for the customer, though.

            But this difference is due to how the market is structured:

            – Apple was able to force this onto the carriers. Other manufacturers were not.

            – The marketshare of Microsoft is miniscule. Samsung e.g. wants to sell 10 Million SGS3 in July alone while Nokia was only able to sell 2 Million Windows phones as a whole in Q1 2012! So whatever MS does, it does not even matter.

            • Arag0n
            • 7 years ago

            I don´t care about how much marketshare has windows phone… I don´t care if they have a 0.1% or 25%…. the point is: they defined an updating mechanism that allows manufacturers and carriers to have cheaper updates (almost free) and it makes manufacturers that may not be manufacturing a phone anymore (Dell Venue Pro) deliver updates while Android manufacturers have a higher cost to create an update and your phone will never get it even if it can and the phone is still selling TODAY but just not too much. Just top of the line phones of each company get updates to keep the company outlook being nice. So sorry, your argument about the problem of Android vs Apple updates saying that is because how the market is structured is faulty at it´s best.

            I’m sorry, but you really like Android and I get it, but it is blinding you. Your argument about windows phone having lower sales than android would be similar to the time that MSN was the most used IM network and Skype had almost no users, if any. Should you deny the clear advantages that Skype had at that time because their share was ridiculous or should you as customer be able to see what MSN is not doing and should be possible to be done and as Microsoft what other smaller companies are doing that you don´t do yet and could improve your service?

            Maybe the example is much more clear with Gmail for you, since you are a google boy. Microsoft once had the 90% of worldwide email addresses in hotmail. However, they didn´t improve the service for several years and google came with Gmail offering much better storage space and more responsive and clean interface. At the beginning it had totally no users and hey, I think that if you had the statistics I wouldn´t be surprised if Hotmail still has more users than Gmail. Does it mean that whatever gmail did the first 3 years of life with meaningless marketshare didn´t matter? Same could have been said for google Chrome. I remember a friend of mine that laughed about how google failed to deliver a browser since it only had a 1% users after 1 year. He said, google wasn´t offering anything that firefox wasn´t already doing, still you can see now how wrong he was.

            Really, WP is growing slowly, but is growing. At some point most prime time apps will have sense to be develop to WP and the app-gap will disappear. Once it happens you will have an ecosystem that is more stable and well designed than Android. Better update mechanisms, better SDK and developer tools, better integration with desktop development and more consistent GUI design guidelines. It will be pretty close to apple consistency but without apple dictatorship around hardware, so you can guess who is going to dominate who in the long run if google doesn´t learn a lesson or two.

            • BabelHuber
            • 7 years ago

            Windows Mobile had what – ca. 20% marketshare in 2009 or so. Now in 2012 Windows Phone has 2% worldwide or so.

            Hence Windows Phone is an utter failure. Let’s see if Windows Phone 8 can change this, but I have my doubts.

            I’ll state it again: In the mobile phone market, phones sell well if the carriers support them. You simply cannot compare this with the browser market, where I just can download another one or try out mutiple ones.

            Name me a reason why carriers should push Windows Phone instead of Android. I guess you already know that carriers dislike Skype. Now that Windows Phone 8 has Skype integrated by default, carriers have even LESS reason to favour Windows Phone over Android.

            Google did everything right so far: They have good carrier relationships, lots of manufacturers and a very good market share, which means more apps for Android.

            Forecasts say that in 2012, about 700 Million smartphones will be sold. 300 Million of those will be in the sub-100$ region (unsubsidized!)

            These 300 Million low-cost phones will run Android, Bada or Symbian, but not Windows Phone.

            Hence your pipe dreams of Windows Phone gaining traction won’t come true IMHO.

            So at the end of the day you have iOS and Android, at least when we talk about July 2012 instead of some fictional near-future-scenario which most likely won’t come true anyways.

            • Arag0n
            • 7 years ago

            Do you really got my point? Seems you want to focus the conversation about if windows phone is or is not more popular…. sure it´s not right now, but you can´t deny it. Anyways, you didn´t get my point. I dont care about Windows Phone popularity. Actually, Windows Phone shows that even with phones that sell a tenth or a 20th of Android models Microsoft is able to keep those models updated while Android phones can´t be. So the fact that microsoft has little marketshare with windows phone plays in my favor not yours.

            Windows Phone has little marketshare, phones are far less popular than most android devices, some manufacturers already dropped the ball about some models and manufacturing and WP fails in almost all comparisons…. however, still has a much better updatability than android and phones are mostly updated within 2 to 4 months time span.

            So keep yourself trying to argue about how popular is or is not windows phone, I’m not talking about it, the main point is Android updates. If microsoft with a shity marketshare and manufacturers with phew to no interest to update those phones in comparision with Android models can keep the ecosystem updated, why google can’t? EASY: Updates are broken in android, and google needs to learn a lesson.

            No matter how much you like google, that’s a fact, and no matter how much marketshare google has with Android, android has broken things. Shit, almost everyone worldwide has a Windows PC but still you can see that windows do wrong things. Hey, internet explorer was a shit since firefox 1.0 till IE 9.0 and in all that period IE was the most used browser worldwide. Don´t confuse marketshare with product quality…. WP miss many things and overall the product is worse than Android right now for most of users, but you must understand what WP is doing better than Android, and what Android can do to improve. Easy right? In your case seems not.

            But really you still don´t get my point, do you? I’m not trying to defend WP as a better platform, I’m just using WP as an example of a platform with multiple manufacturers that is regularly updated and doesn´t suffer of the same problems that Android has. I’m not trying to say that WP is better,I’m not here to defend that everyone should buy a WP, I’m not here to talk about how shitty Android is, I’m just here to talk about HOW BAD ANDROID IS WITH UPDATES. Shit, you are like an iPhone fanboy that still thinks that only the iPhone has Google Earth and proper email! And iOS is so advanced and ahead of Android that it has no sense to learn from Android what iOS can do that is not already doing to make iOS better.

            I’m just gonna give you another example: Chrome several years ago had little to no marketshare. Still, Chrome was one of the first if not the first browser to use JIT Compilation for JavaScript. That made JavaScript in Chrome around 10 times faster than in any other browser. Firefox, IE and Safari saw that and all other major browsers copied the idea of using JIT engines for JavaScript. That was something easy to see comparing IE8.0 vs Chrome. At the same time IE9 at launch had little to no marketshare but was the first browser to use GPU Acceleration to draw browser elements as images and text using DirectDraw. Everyone saw that also, and all major browsers implemented GPU Acceleration. Now, I can go back to mobile. Android use to not have GPU acceleration neither JIT compilation for JAVA. That´s why Android 2.1 was extremly choopy and felt so slow in front of WP devices and iOS. Google saw that and they did the necessary changes to add JIT for JAVA apps in 2.2 and added GPU Acceleration for rendered elements in ICS. I can keep going all the day about examples of different companies doing better things than other companies. Specially cases where products with little to no marketshare made bigger products to implement things they didn´t think before and change their own system. So please, understand that. WP shows HOW IT´S POSSIBLE to have an ecosystem distributed between different manufacturers vendors with a single software provider and still, keep the ecosystem updated and in a healthy state. This conversation is not about products marketshare, it´s about different update strategies for mobile OS´s, so please understand that once and forever. MARKETSHARE != QUALITY, NON POPULAR APPS/OS != NOTHING TO LEARN FROM.

            • BabelHuber
            • 7 years ago

            No, you do not get the point:

            You compare the mobile phone market with markets which are structured completely different. There is no point in comparing the mobile phone market with the browser market, because there are no similarities.
            You could as well compare mobile phones with nuclear power plants.

            So, Windows Phone makes updates easy. This is true.

            But the point is that this has not helped Microsoft the least in gaining market share.

            Windows Phone probably does some things better than Android, but at the end of the day Android is a huge success while Windows Phone is an utter failure in the market.

            So I state it again: Being able to update your phone without effort is not the be-all-end-all. Hundreds of Millions of Android buyers per year seemingly do not care very much about this or simply use Custom ROMs.

            So please stop your pointless rants. Yes, Windows Phone can be updated easier than Android. And no, this fact did not help Windows Phone at all to become a success.

            • Arag0n
            • 7 years ago

            Such a brainwashed fandroid! Do I have to repeat you again that I DONT CARE ABOUT MARKETSHARE?

            I’m trying to explain to you how wrong you are thinking that Android updates can´t be done better and finally you agree WP does a much better job, but since it doesn´t help WP to get more marketshare you claim it means Android should not bother improving it? Really, are you crazy or something? No matter how different browser and mobile market are, the philosophy is the same. You could say the same with almost every market IT or not. Opera is a main innovator in browser market, still is a “failure” because it´s only used by a phew 1 to 2% of the web, but it´s my browser of choice. Why? Because there is several things that makes me browse in Opera better than in IE, Firefox and Chrome, still I use chrome and IE (no firefox love, sorry) for some websites, but most of my love is on Opera. And other browsers check on opera features to see what they can do that they are not already doing.

            So please, stop this stupid conversation about marketshare. There is a simple FACT, WP has a better update system than Android with a very similar business model, that means that google should be able to learn from WHY WP has better update system and HOW they can improve Android update system learning from them. Really, I’m tired, that’s my last try to make you understand that you can learn from everyone, even the shitty idiot that is selling big macs in mcdonals at 45 years old. Not because WP is not a huge marketshare hit Android can’t try to learn from what they are doing right. Just look at iOS. They saw WP social integration and now they will have Facebook (previously Twitter). They see that WP does it better, no matter the marketshare of WP, so they learn and improve. That´s how a market leader behaves. A market leader doesn´t innovate without looking to others to learn and see what they are doing. A market leaders keeps pushing themselves against competition and try to understand what others do and where they try to go, what they do better and what can they do to avoid that advantage to be significant and at the same time, keep their own innovating line going on so competition doesn´t develop features they don´t have and they try to develop features other don´t have yet. You may remember some time ago that XBOX team in 2008 when OnLive had NO USERS and still has no significant amount of users the XBOX team shows in their internal PPT what OnLive offers that XBOX doesn´t and what they can do to avoid that advantage from making the XBOX obsolete.

            • BabelHuber
            • 7 years ago

            Are you really that stupid?

            Yes, Windows Phone is easier to upgrade.

            At what price?

            MS does not allow the carriers to customize the UI very much.

            You simply cannot combine Android’s and Windows Phone’s approach.

            Either you are very flexible, then you have the update problem, or you are unflexible, then you restrict the carriers.

            Now what has market share to do with that?

            The carriers embrace Android, while they don’t embrace Windows Phone.

            In case you have more than 3 brain cells, you should understand this.

            • Arag0n
            • 7 years ago

            WP also offer flexibility to carriers. What WP does is isolate the core from those customizations. Can you really understand that? And last time I checked carriers didn´t complain about WP restrictions neither show it as a reason to not offer Windows Phones.

            But finally seems you try to be back to topic. Google should learn that carriers are not against selling phones that they can´t customize as hell. WP and iOS prove that. So Android can be a bit more restrictive with what Carriers can change in order to ensure that updates can be deployed more smoothly.

            Usually most of those customizations come in the form of custom apps and games that are considered crappy apps that also come in windows phone. The difference is that WP ensures that those apps are not broken if the system is updated while carriers need to recode part of the apps to approve those updates.

            See it? Still you think google has nothing to learn? You are or a brainwashed person or just plain full of yourself. You see the problem and the reason, yeah I do too, but I also see how it can be improved and solved and just because I do and I don´t agree with your statement that “Android is perfect, google does nothing wrong, it can’t be improve because that´s how google works”, you think I’m stupid or something, funny world…

            The person that sees the problem but thinks there is no solution saying to the person that knows the solution if he is stupid or something….

            • BabelHuber
            • 7 years ago

            Yes, the carriers love WP!

            That’s why they prefer selling Android. That’s why WP hasn’t gained any traction in the market during the last 2 years.

            • Arag0n
            • 7 years ago

            Yeah… that´s why AT&T, T-Mobile, Verizon and Sprint all have WP and all of them want WP to become a viable third ecosystem to avoid the dualization of the market… it has nothing to do with the OS.

            They don´t prefer selling Android, they sell more Android phones because Android sells more phones. It has nothing to do with carrier customizations at all.

            • BabelHuber
            • 7 years ago

            I disagree here.

            Carriers want competition with multiple suppliers, not multiple OS.

            From what I have seen, carriers pay lip service to WP, take the money from MS and Nokia, then turn around and sell Android.

            • Arag0n
            • 7 years ago

            [url<]http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57416405-94/will-verizon-throw-its-weight-behind-windows-phone/[/url<] [url<]http://blogs.computerworld.com/20094/why_windows_phone_may_succeed_carriers_hate_apple[/url<] I think they both disagree with you...

            • BabelHuber
            • 7 years ago

            I’ve seen other analysts like Tomi Ahonen disagree.

            So let’s see in one year.

            My prediction: WP 8 will fail like WP 7.

            Perhaps I will be wrong, but I don’t think so.

            • Arag0n
            • 7 years ago

            It’s easy to predict that things won´t change, the hard thing is to predict that things will change and be right. It´s always safer for analyst to say that everything will stay the same. I don´t think WP can be a hit as Android is right now, but I do thing will keep growing and maybe faster than now with WP8.

            • Arag0n
            • 7 years ago

            Oh, and Stargate had 2 million viewers, Friends had 20 million viewers. That should mean that Stargate is such a failure as TV show because it has a much lower number of viewers than Friends….

            Android makes 1.6% of the money that iOS does, that means that for every 100$ that Apple makes from iOS, Android for google makes 1.6$. That’s 62 times more. So android should be considered a failure for google since it didn´t improve Google revenue at all almost.

            Now, WP in USA is around 4% right now and Android is around 40%, so Microsoft has “only” 10 times less market than Android, and what´s more funny. Android revenue for google in 2011 was $1.4 billion (including ad revenue from AdMob, search and google play), WP revenue is calculated around $0.6 billion without including ad-revenue from PubCenter, so Microsoft already makes half the money that Android does.

            Oh, and of course most of that revenue since it comes from AdMob and Search and given that AdMob and Search also work on iOS is likely that without Android google made the same amount of money thant with Android….. funny facts has this world!

            I’m gonna tell you who benefits the most from Android….. SAMSUNG! Samsung makes more benefit from Android in 1Q than Google has done since 2008!!

            • BabelHuber
            • 7 years ago

            The problem is your narrow view on the US market only.

            Internationally, Windows Phone is a niche product, while Android is a huge success. The fact that Windows Phone does better in the US than in most other markets does not change this fact.

            Google does not want to primary make money with Android, Einstein! Google wants to have a platform where its services run onto! The more people use this platform, the better for Google.

            Hence Google does not care that Samsung makes more money with Android, on contrary, providing an OS with which the OEMs can make money is crucial for Google’s approach!

            But you don’t get how the mobile phone market works, you just throw around meaningless numbers.

            • Arag0n
            • 7 years ago

            Really? I’m spanish and I live in China, do you really think my view is constrained to USA market? I just used USA market as sample for something that is commonly known, Higgs! Maybe they didn´t teach you in school that you can´t offer reference points for your explanations that the other person is not familiar with….

            Android makes almost no money, I know that google wants to empower their services via Android, the point is how many more users use Google Search because Android exist? How many more users has Gmail because Android? How many more users has Google+ because Android? If you can´t answer those questions it means that while Android may be helping google, in doesn´t means it´s the most efficient way.

            Google would benefit 10 times more from a Google+ at the scale of Facebook than having 100% smartphone marketshare… at least twice, since Facebook has 1.5 billion users and Android+iOS have around 600-700 millions with at least a 100 millions in China, a maket with almost no profitability for Google while Facebook users are mostly from developed nations that are highly profitable for Google.

            From financial and business point of view Android is not a great business for Google just as Bing is not a great busines for MS. They may have a 5% searched worldwide and 30% searched in the USA, but it´s a business that right now just drains money and doesn´t increase the value of Microsoft. I agree Android is better than Bing, but Android is much worse business than Xbox. Xbox made +8 billion revenue for MS last year, Total revenue of Google last year is ~38 billion and MS total revenue is 69.9 billions.That means that Android is a 4% of Google revenue and Xbox is an 11% of MS revenue. Hey, XBOX could be 21% of google business. And that´s despite the fact that there is hundreds of millions less xbox than Android devices.

            Last time I checked mobile manufacturers didn´t want to make profit /s (i dont think you would understand without /s). Of course that the fact that manufacturers can make money from Android will make manufacturers want to do Android phones. But do you know what´s the problem? That 95% of that benefits are from SAMSUNG! No other company almost makes money, and most of the remaining 5% is HTC. Manufacturers don´t make money from Android, only samsung does. You can see Motorola that despite being the market leader for Android still losses money and had to be sold to Google to survive and HTC is lossing revenue QoQ (58% last report) so it might join the “losing money with Android club” pretty soon, leaving just Samsung with almost the 100%. Android is a big ball, where only Samsung does real money and Google does a bit of money. The reason every manufacturer uses Android is because at least, Android proved to be profitable for Samsung while WP still hasn´t proved to be profitable for Nokia. So no, I’m sorry. Android is not profitable. Only 1 manufacturer has a real bright future with Android, everyone else is struggling to keep barely profitable or losing money already.

            • BabelHuber
            • 7 years ago

            This is true, currently Samsung makes the most money with Android.

            But this doesn’t mean that you cannot make money with Android, it only shows that Samsung outperforms all other handset makers in this area.

            But you also must take the sub-100$-phones into account, e.g. Huawei. These cheap phones will also provide lots of market share for Google.

            I personally wouldn’t like a duopoly between Apple and Samsung. I’d rather have more competition, since this benefits the customer.

            • Arag0n
            • 7 years ago

            Sure, but the problem is not sub 100$ phones, it wouldn´t be a problem if those phones made 5$ each for Huawei it would be a huge market success. The problem is that they sell at loss because they tare trying to join the Android market pie and that pie is already saturated.

            The problem with Android for manufacturers is that updates are expensive and handset development is expensive because every handset needs it´s own code customizations. There isn´t enough abstraction layers in Android from the underlying hardware to reduce the costs for manufacturers and the OS isn´t enough isolated from manufacturer modifications (mostly the launcher). That´s why Samsung is the most and almost single profitable Android manufacturer, because they have a huge success in their Galaxy line making those development and update costs negligible.

            That´s where Google can learn a lesson from Microsoft. They can develop not just a Nexus devices but also a “Nexus Android System”, that means that Android whatever version ICS, JB is optimized and has all the required drivers to work with a defined set of components. Manufacturers are still able to differentiate via case design and other elements that are neutral to Android system such as speakers quality, glass/plastic screen, CPU frequency etc. But it would make much cheaper android update/developing platform. They could have the most 3 common chassis predefined such as low – mid – high tiers, so there is hardware consistency. It would help small Android manufacturers to be profitable even if they sell phew devices from each model. Still, they leave Android open so everyone can come with their own hardware requirements and make Android work for that specific hardware, but manufacturers will only do that if there is a strong reason for it.

            • BabelHuber
            • 7 years ago

            I really don’t see your point here:

            You say that Google should act like MS, but I see no reason for Google to do so. After all they have a huge success all over the globe.

            There really is no reason for them to take lessons from a failed OS.

            Besides, as a customer I like choice. I do not want to chose between 5 phones with identical specs and different cases. I like having different SoCs in different phones. But this is just my opinion.

            • Arag0n
            • 7 years ago

            Here we go again… even the biggest failure has good things. And even from failures you can learn at least why they fail, so you better don´t ignore them. Do not think that because WP doesn´t have huge marketshare doesn´t mean that they are not doing some things better than Android, and it doesn´t mean that WP8 will be a sub 5% marketshare forever. Microsoft has already shown how they play their cards. The first XBOX was an introduction to market and then they jumped with the XBOX 360 and got the top market position in a market dominated by Sony and Nintendo. The reason? MS knew the online gaming was important, they already did that in the first XBOX but Sony ignored that while developing the PS3 since they didn´t saw the original XBOX as menace to the PS2, so it would not be possible to be a menace to the PS3…. they were wrong. The fact that they ignored the XBOX made them not work around online gaming. They kept their way of doing online gaming “The PC way”, with users requested to handle router ports to be able to connect to other players and every single game having its own online gaming system, that and an stupid price tag made a hole for XBOX 360 to enter a market that PS3 didn´t serve for 2 or 3 years after launch. Android has several weak points, if Google ignores MS approach they may have the same luck that had sony with the PS3 or MS itself with WM against the iPhone. Never laugh about your competition, learn from them. No matter how phew marketshare they have, no matter how shitty they look today.

            Last time I check developer interest in Android was dropping because fragmentation. If you read me, I’m not saying android should avoid manufacturers to be able to create their own customized handsets. What I’m saying is that Google needs to learn that they can create a reference system design that manufacturers can use to reduce costs on both updates and development. Top tier handsets would still be heavy customizations of manufacturers but given that those phones are expected to have higher margins and more sales that cost should be negligible.

            That means that whatever comes to be the GS4 it´s different that whatever comes to be the LG x8 or HTC Two X, but manufacturers like huawei, ZTE and others can create devices in a very inexpensive way that are easy to update so users are not left with handsets that will never see a better version of android than what they were sold with. Make it easy to create a good cheap android handset, and leave the high end customizations for manufacturers. It doesn´t really change the landscape and improves the UX of most Android users, so it improves the users opinion about Android.

          • cynan
          • 7 years ago

          Apparently that’s not always guaranteed to work. And if I’m going to go through the trouble, I may as well just put my own custom rom on anyway..

    • Bensam123
    • 7 years ago

    And behold what has been plaguing nix for years.

    Google should just do everything under the surface and make a api that allows manufacturers to install themes or whatever nonsense they want to on top.

    • oldog
    • 7 years ago

    Why is it that MS gets so much heat for orphaning their WinPhones at version 7.8 but Google still gets the love for Android when nobody bothers to upgrade anyway?

    Scratches head.

      • sweatshopking
      • 7 years ago

      ms ONLY GAVE 2 YEARS OF CONFIRMED UPDATES TO 100% OF THE PHONES!

        • Arag0n
        • 7 years ago

        Updates and Upgrades are not the same thing… XP had a long life with updates and SP1, SP2, SP3… but it never got upgraded for free to Windows Vista or 7…. I agree that WP7.5 should have been upgraded, but not because it´s not upgraded means that windows phones at 7.5 or 7.8 won´t be updated. Hey, don´t you see what microsoft did here leaving the 7.8 some headroom to be updated to 7.9?

        So, even if I don´t really like what they did with 7.8 and 8.0, this guy has a very strong point. Android devices most of the time don´t even get basic updates leave alone upgrades. Developers need to target several screen resolutions and at the same time, they need to target API levels from 7 to 15. WP developers will just need to handle with developing for 7.X if they want backwards compatibility and developing for 8.X if they need new features. That´s a far cry from Android situation and is more inline with iOS developers targeting iOS 4 or iOS 5. It may happen that microsoft keeps selling WP7.8 devices as low end devices with a sub-set of the apps and games, but still, it would still be better than Android.

        So yeah, I agree with him, Microsoft gets so hard hits for things that Google do daily without anyone really complaining.

          • sweatshopking
          • 7 years ago

          I was of course saying ms does it better. I would consider the 7.5 and 7.8 major updates.

      • Decelerate
      • 7 years ago

      Because with Android you can blame Google, the Maker (Samsung, HTC, etc), and/or the carrier (Verizon, ATT, etc) for not having your update. Heck, I bet each party will give you the runaround by blaming the other party.

      With MS who do you want to blame? Nokia? The phone maker will just shrug and show you a picture of the 2B$ check…

      Personally I don’t care so much about the “7.8 vs 8.0, oh my” as the “8.x apps may not be supported in 7.x”. It’s the app support that gives the whole early adopters the shaft.

    • StuG
    • 7 years ago

    While my phone has had it since May apparently, I just upgraded to it today. Pretty nice improvement!

    • Chrispy_
    • 7 years ago

    Samsung are terrible at this. I probably won’t buy anything Android from Samsung on it until they stop skinning stuff. Especially if they can’t even make all of the stock Android features work properly (just google “Samsung MTP” and brace yourself for the sh*tstorm)

    I really really want to see a Motorola phone from the new Google/Motorola partnership that is just “stock” Android. The Defy+ was a pretty damn good phone, balancing a high-dpi screen, decent battery life, small form factor and rugged water-resistant, shockproof design. The only thing wrong with it was of course the heavy Motorola cusomisation.

      • juampa_valve_rde
      • 7 years ago

      Motoblur is just bloatware. Im using Cyanogenmod on my Defy (non plus, same soc, lame lens) since a while and it really gets all the juice from the phone, i never tought it could run fast, smooth and with the latest os and apps for that price.
      Maybe im to much of a gorilla as i was able to scratch the screen 3 times!

    • Silus
    • 7 years ago

    I understand the need to want the latest greatest version of the OS available, but when news such as these appear I usually see comments about how Android is a failure because of them. And that is nothing more than a non-sequitur. Yes not having updates is lame, but that doesn’t make Android a failure nor does the last version become crap as a consequence of a newer version being available. Gingerbread is a very nice phone OS (I’m using version 2.3.7 in a CyanogenMod ROM) and it does everything I need it to and then some.
    If it becomes available, I’ll definitely jump to the newer version, but the last version still works very well!

      • Chrispy_
      • 7 years ago

      Windows95 still plays plenty of OpenGL games, opens many files and can run passable browsers just fine. The problem is that quite frequently the latest and coolest feature you want to try requires a later version.

      Your gingerbread example is less extreme, of course, because the features added in ICS such as face unlock and uh, what else was added that anyone cares about?

      Yeah. At least a few versions old is usually not even worth caring about.

      • Corrado
      • 7 years ago

      The problem becomes, what version of the OS do developers aim for? What version of the APIs do they write to? Whats the minimum hardware they should support?

      If the vast majority of users are on GB, you write to GB, correct? Except that that leaves out a lot of whiz bang features found in ICS and now Jelly Bean. And if you’re write to either of those, you just cut your market by 90%.

      • swaaye
      • 7 years ago

      Consider the forum you’re posting into. People here like to be on the bleeding edge regardless of practicality and last year’s stuff is no longer interesting.

    • lethal
    • 7 years ago

    I’m not sure if other roms like cyanogenmod are counted (which is based on ICS), but given the glacial pace of samsung to release ICS (my Galaxy S2 is one of the variants that never got a official ICS…) most people that care about their firmware version will flash their phones themselves. The biggest problem besides wanting to customize their own version is changing the hardware so frequently, specially on the same “model”. There are at least 10 different versions of the Galaxy S2, and they also have different roms depending on where you bought it or the carrier.

    • Phydoux
    • 7 years ago

    If I stick with an Android phone, my next phone will either be an international (unlocked) version, like the Galaxy S III, or the next Google Nexus phone, whenever that comes out.

    Reasons to go with an unlocked international version:
    – Cyanogenmod and other custom roms are much more likely to be released for it
    – I can use it both at home in the U.S.A. and also in Europe, when I go on business trips
    – They don’t have all of the crap that the US carriers like to pile onto them

    Reasons to go with a Google Nexus phone
    – OS updates directly from Google
    – Cyanogenmod and other custom ROMs are almost guaranteed
    – No carrier branding

    Cons of both unlocked international phones and Nexus phones
    – Expensive since you don’t subsidize the phone cost through a contract, although I understand that some carriers do offer a Nexus phone with a contract
    – Seems like the last Nexus phone was actually not quite the most current hardware at the time it was released

    If you’re willing to get slightly older hardware, the current Galaxy Nexus phone is only $349.
    Unless I’m super strapped for cash, I’m going to avoid renewing any contracts and going with another carrier-branded phone. I’m just tired of it.

    Just my $.02.

      • stdRaichu
      • 7 years ago

      [quote<]- Expensive since you don't subsidize the phone cost through a contract, although I understand that some carriers do offer a Nexus phone with a contract[/quote<] I can't vouch for the US, but here in the UK it's almost always cheaper in the long run to buy your own phone (regardless of model) and get a SIM-only plan. Over the course of the contract you generally end up paying less money over time at the cost of more up front, as well as getting the freedom to update your own phone and move between carriers. Most subsidised phones over here come coupled with a 2yr contract, whereas SIM-only deals can be done pre-pay, on a monthly rolling contract or yearly rolling contract. I'd suggest you do the maths on this and see what the total expenditure is, since I wouldn't consider something "expensive" if it saves you money after a reasonable period of time.

        • Corrado
        • 7 years ago

        In the US, the plans cost the same whether you’re on a contract or not, so you’re almost silly for NOT getting a subsidized phone, aside from the contract fee if you break it before its up.

          • stdRaichu
          • 7 years ago

          Yikes, seriously?! That’s unbelievable.

          Do I take it from your missive that if the phone breaks within the contract period, it’s not replaced by the carrier? Because that would also be unbelievable; everyone I know here who’s broken a contract phone has had a new one shipped out gratis.

            • DancinJack
            • 7 years ago

            There are options. There is usually a one year manufacturer warranty on the phone that covers you in case something goes wrong with the phone due to manufacturing or production. This does not include cracking your screen, water damage, or normal wear and tear. Most carriers provide “insurance” through a third party (Asurion – in a lot of cases). At least with Verizon there are two levels of coverage. You’ll have to pay a monthly fee AND a deductible to get a “new” phone. [url=http://support.verizonwireless.com/clc/features/calling_features/equipment_protection.html<]Here[/url<] is the Verizon info.

          • BobbinThreadbare
          • 7 years ago

          Except with T-Mobile.

            • DancinJack
            • 7 years ago

            As soon as my current contract is up I’m planning one of those Monthly 4G plans to be my next phone service. I guess I’ll see what’s there when it’s time.

            • MadManOriginal
            • 7 years ago

            Except the phone choices kind of blow. There is no true ‘buy your own phone – any phone – and pay for month-month’ option that I’ve seen.

            • DancinJack
            • 7 years ago

            You don’t have to buy from T-Mo.

            • MadManOriginal
            • 7 years ago

            Not bad then. Too bad T-Mobile’s network has the worst coverage of the big 3 🙁

            Along these lines, Virgin Mobiloe just added a few new phones within the last week – iPhone 4S for the Apple lovers for $650 and HTC One V for $200. Going to research the latter to see how similar it is to the other HTC One versions. They’ve had the LG Optimus Elite for a little while too, it’s now $120 on their website. (Amazon has had it for $130 for a bit now.)

            I am finally going to jump on the Smartphone bandwagon soon here 😮 Just want the right combo of phone and service price. The Virgin options are looking good right now, I’m leery of T-Mobile’s coverage in my area.

            • DancinJack
            • 7 years ago

            You’ll want to be careful. Virgin is a CDMA network while T-Mo is GSM. I’m only saying this because of what I said earlier about not buying the phone from the actual company.

            • MadManOriginal
            • 7 years ago

            Yeah I’m aware of the different radio types and compatibility even if I couldn’t really tell you what those differences are.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 7 years ago

            Yeah, I bought a G2x which is a T-Mo phone but I didn’t buy from them. Just pop in your SIM and you’re good to go. Any fully-unlocked phone (Galaxy Nexus for example) that uses T-Mo’s 1700/2100MHz bands and you’re good to go.

            They do NOT allow pre-paid plans to data roam on AT&T. Voice only. I learned that by experience. Not a deal-breaker to me.

            • Corrado
            • 7 years ago

            You still have a G2x? I had one at launch. Talk about a clusterfudge. That thing was a pile of smelly pooh. I returned it after 7 weeks of them promising the 2.3 upgrade ‘any day now’.

            I liked the hardware, but LG really screwed the pooch on the software. Did they ever fix it?

            • derFunkenstein
            • 7 years ago

            Right before I bought it, they released a 2.3.4 update that has made it, apparently, a really solid phone for me. I have not experienced a single lock up, random reboot, random shutdown, crash, etc. But I got it very late in the lifecycle. It also got a new baseband, and the theories on XDA are that the baseband was the big fix rather than anything in the 2.3.4 update.

            I ran CM 7.2 RC2 and RC3 on it, but in the end battery life was so much better on stock and CM7 didn’t give me anything I couldn’t live without.

            • Corrado
            • 7 years ago

            Thats cool, glad it worked out for you. Being one of, if not THE first Tegra 2 phone on the market, I had to get my geek claws into the first dual core phone I could. I was bitten… hard. All the issues you listed. Battery life was terrible as well, but it was supposedly the battery driver, not anything else. The driver reported 30% battery left, when there was 3%, for example and it would just die. Or it would report 8% when there was 42% so people thought their battery was dead, but it would last for hours with 2% left.

            The fact that it took them MONTHS to get out an update to make it work is testament to their terrible CS.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 7 years ago

            Yeah, that’s probably why it was only on the market for a relatively short time, and also probably why I could get one brand new in the box for under $200. I did a bit of research that said the latest update made it good finally, and it certainly seems to have. Fantastic (for a phone, so damning with faint praise) 8MP camera, too. Totally killed the need for my cheap-ass Nikon P&S camera and smaller, too.

          • MadManOriginal
          • 7 years ago

          As a general rule, yeah, it does depend on the phone you want too. The bigger carriers only allow certain, more basic phones on pre-paid month-to-month service, you can’t just buy any unlocked phone you want and sign up for monthly service. (Maybe there are unsupported ways around this, just not through official channels.) So most of the ‘pay full price for phone and less for service’ options are very limited in hardware choice. It’s really stupid and the only reason for it is to push people into expensive contracts.

          There isn’t even an option I’ve seen to buy your own phone *and* sign a contract – that option, if available, would in theory have lower monthly service prices.

          The US subsidy system sucks.

          • cynan
          • 7 years ago

          Canada has been largely the same.

          • kc77
          • 7 years ago

          Well there are other reasons not to get a subsidized phone.

          1) Your phone isn’t full of the carriers crap. Some of it is so insidious it costs you money.
          2) Your phone gets updated MUCH faster with an international phone.
          3) New phones mean renewed contracts and when that happens if you want to leave the carrier for any reason before the contract expires expect to pay 200 dollars.
          4) New contracts usually mean new data plans and depending on the carrier usually it’s more money than you were paying before.
          5) Your selection of what you can buy is much larger.

            • Corrado
            • 7 years ago

            Just about the only carrier you can use an international phone on in the US is AT&T. Verizon and Sprint are CDMA and T-Mo uses funky 3G bands. There are plenty of smaller regional carriers, but you’re not guaranteed good roaming that way if you ever go out of state.

      • albundy
      • 7 years ago

      kind of hard for many to drop almost $1000 for a new phone when many carriers dont give discounts if you bring your own. you are pretty much paying for a new phone, and are paying for another one embedded in your contract that you will never physically hold.

      • NeelyCam
      • 7 years ago

      I signed up for 2y contract with At&t, got an Atrix 4G almost free, and unlocked with one of those unlocking websites for some $15. This is my second summer to use it in Finland, and it works great

        • sweatshopking
        • 7 years ago

        You’re back in Finland?

    • delsydsoftware
    • 7 years ago

    I was surprised that Asus had an ICS firmware for my 1st gen transformer within a couple weeks of the general release. Their software support has been fantastic so far.

    • Firestarter
    • 7 years ago

    I just ordered a budget android phone that was released not 1 month ago, and it’s running 2.3, with the promise of an update to 4.0. I think that’s rather telling, and a good indication that Google should push OEMs harder to stay current.

    • shaurz
    • 7 years ago

    It’s hardware vendors and carriers getting in the way. Apple is in the nice position of being able to dictate to carriers and being both the hardware and software vendor. I wish it were possible to get OS updates directly from Google. Theoretically this is possible, but you would need to throw out customisations and also test on all hardware before deploying (a daunting task).

      • DancinJack
      • 7 years ago

      Or buy a GSM Nexus product.

        • indeego
        • 7 years ago

        Or just forget about it because the mobile world moves so fast that if your phone is a year or older it’s pretty much very much outdated.

        Why don’t I worry about ICS? Because my phone wouldn’t really run any better on it, and possibly worse.

          • DancinJack
          • 7 years ago

          That’s one of the beautiful things about Android though. Why not give a custom ICS rom a try? Especially if your phone is out of warranty. Once you get the basics down, it doesn’t take long to go from rom to rom and back to a backup. It’s pretty addicting actually.

            • indeego
            • 7 years ago

            I don’t have time, don’t care, I just want the most stability/reliability out of my phone as it’s more a work emergency device than personal distraction.

            Perhaps the methods have changed, last I looked into rooting/Romming my particular phone there were waittimes of hours to get it back up and running and issues with camera/4G. Documentation was spotty and lot of issues in the forums. I’m not willing to compromise on this like I would be a spare desktop and a new linux dist..

            • DancinJack
            • 7 years ago

            That’s entirely possible. I know with the LTE Galaxy Nexus I had though, It took me about 15 minutes start to finish to back up my current ROM, install a new one, and get apps and data restored. Phones that are really popular are obviously going to have better developer support.

          • MadManOriginal
          • 7 years ago

          ‘Very outdated’ only in terms of hardware release date – I think that calling them very outdated is pure perception on your part because there has been a lot of development in mobile hardware. It doesn’t mean that the phones can’t run the OS and majority of applications well, or well enough. Maybe for 3D games the graphics hardware matters more, or for the OS and apps things will be slow (I find smartphones pretty slow regardless) but they still ought to work.

          Also the ‘very outdated’ perception will go away quickly now that the initial, rapid advance phase in mobile phones is ending. Majority of phones (mid-range and up) will have dual core CPUs and at least passable graphics capabilities going forward. Should it still be ok that <1 year-old devices that are still under service contract don’t get software updates?

          It would be like saying a C2D level system is very outdated. Sure, it is because there have been multiple generations since then, but it can still run lots of software perfectly well.

            • indeego
            • 7 years ago

            I can completely tell the difference in a C2D system and modern i5/i7. A Core2Duo system [u<]is[/u<] outdated, in my opinion. Likewise, my phone (Charge) isn't even listed anywhere on the benches anymore at Anandtech. Hell, Droid 4, just released ~4 months ago, is near the bottom of the list in terms of performance. There are phones with both better performance by 3X AND better battery life by 2X. It's not even worth bothering to mod this one compared to [having work shell out to] get another one. I totally notice a difference with my phone's performance. If I have many notifications, it's sluggish on input. Memory management is pretty bad. The proximity sensor sucks when using phone away from face, it's camera drains the battery within an hour or so. The latest reviews I read don't show any of this. Nah, just gonna get whatever is the best of the best in Q4 2012, and will be fine.

        • shaurz
        • 7 years ago

        I’m thinking of doing that next time, when they bring out the successor to Galaxy Nexus.

    • kamikaziechameleon
    • 7 years ago

    I got an HTC because of their minimal overlay and quick adoption of updates and patches from google. My phone is on 4.0.3 now and the difference from the starting OS of 2.2 is quite amazing. I get double the battery life and all around more functionality out of my phone.

      • Disco
      • 7 years ago

      I got a HTC Amaze back in December. I really liked the HTC Sense overlay relative to the basic Android and even the Samsung Galaxy2. I was just upgraded to ICS 2 weeks ago. Overall, that’s a reasonable timeframe. There was nothing really spectacular that the ICS added to what my ‘phone’ already did. The battery life might be a little longer… not sure.

        • Arag0n
        • 7 years ago

        So 7 months and half is a reasonable time frame?

    • superjawes
    • 7 years ago

    Anroid articles make me hungry…

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This